Commit Message

After test on rockchiop platform, i found sometims driver would failed
at reading EDID message. After debugging more, i found that it's okay
to read_a byte from i2c, but it would failed at AUX transcation if we
try to ready multi-bytes from i2c.
Driver just can't received the AUX CH reply command, even no AUX error
code. I may guess that the AUX wait time is not enough, so I try to
expand the AUX wait time, and i do see this could fix the EDID read
failed at rockchip platform.
And I thought that expand the wait time won't hurt Exynos platform too
much, cause Exynos didn't have this problem, then driver would received
the reply command very soon, so no more additional wait time would bring
to Exynos platform.
Signed-off-by: Yakir Yang <ykk@rock-chips.com>
---
Changes in v11: None
Changes in v10: None
Changes in v9: None
Changes in v8: None
Changes in v7: None
Changes in v6: None
Changes in v5: None
Changes in v4: None
Changes in v3: None
Changes in v2: None
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Hi Jingoo,
On 12/22/2015 08:26 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 16, 2015 12:58 PM, Yakir Yang wrote:>> After test on rockchiop platform, i found sometims driver would failed>> at reading EDID message. After debugging more, i found that it's okay>> to read_a byte from i2c, but it would failed at AUX transcation if we>> try to ready multi-bytes from i2c.>>>> Driver just can't received the AUX CH reply command, even no AUX error>> code. I may guess that the AUX wait time is not enough, so I try to>> expand the AUX wait time, and i do see this could fix the EDID read>> failed at rockchip platform.>>>> And I thought that expand the wait time won't hurt Exynos platform too>> much, cause Exynos didn't have this problem, then driver would received>> the reply command very soon, so no more additional wait time would bring>> to Exynos platform.>>>> Signed-off-by: Yakir Yang <ykk@rock-chips.com>>> --->> Changes in v11: None>> Changes in v10: None>> Changes in v9: None>> Changes in v8: None>> Changes in v7: None>> Changes in v6: None>> Changes in v5: None>> Changes in v4: None>> Changes in v3: None>> Changes in v2: None>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c | 2 +->> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c>> index c7e2959..dc376bd 100644>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_reg.c>> @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ int analogix_dp_start_aux_transaction(struct analogix_dp_device *dp)>> reg = readl(dp->reg_base + ANALOGIX_DP_INT_STA);>> while (!(reg & RPLY_RECEIV)) {>> timeout_loop++;>> - if (DP_TIMEOUT_LOOP_COUNT < timeout_loop) {>> + if (DP_TIMEOUT_LOOP_COUNT * 10 < timeout_loop) {> No, I hate this coding.> analogix_dp_reg.c is the common code that can be shared by various SoCs.> Please, find another way.
Okay, I have double checked that i do have this problem in my side.
Hmmm.....
I thought it's okay for you if I expand the "DP_TIMEOUT_LOOP_COUNT"
directly,
it won't hurt Exynos platform too much, cause Exynos didn't have this
problem,
then driver would received,the reply command very soon, so no more
additional
wait time would bring to Exynos platform.
And actually the datasheet haven't described the spec of aux reply delay
time.
Thanks,
- Yakir
> Best regards,> Jingoo Han>>>> dev_err(dp->dev, "AUX CH command reply failed!\n");>> return -ETIMEDOUT;>> }>> -->> 1.9.1>>>>